[blackwingcat]

Hi,Colonel O'Neill

KDW 0.78d and 0.78e have critical bug.
please use 0.78c or 0.78f

kdw set Icondesk's transparent on registry, look trans.reg.

New version WMP10 can work without install KDW in system.

Does the Start Menu's icons trouble occure again after deleting shelliconcache?

Colonel O'Neill, on Aug 11 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

Just letting you know; letting KDW set the ExcludeFromKnownDlls value breaks Daedalus. It also breaks ICONDESK's transparent desktop icon labels (continuous flickering).

However, without it Windows Media Player 10 will not work.

It also messes up the Start Menu's icons, but no other icons that I found were affected.

Btw, you should update the first post to 078e.
As well as the KDWINST file, it says 074.

[Colonel O'Neill]

Alright, I'm using KDW 0.78f now, and have applied the icon label transparency fix.

However, the icons have become 24-bit like before, and the start menu icons are still random.





Does it mean there is a new MP10 installer, or do I just tell the existing one to use the new KDW Binary folder from 0.78f?

This post has been edited by Colonel O'Neill: 11 August 2009 - 09:55 AM

[blackwingcat]

Do you use VistaPack ,Colonel O'Neill ?

I want to try to set look like your environment.

Please try to use EzInstall mode.

1. check EzKD Reg with KDllInst.
2. uninstall KDW shell32.dll from system.
3. install shell32.dll to target application folder with KDllInst ezmode.

Colonel O'Neill, on Aug 11 2009, 11:21 PM, said:

Alright, I'm using KDW 0.78f now, and have applied the icon label transparency fix.

However, the icons have become 24-bit like before, and the start menu icons are still random.





Does it mean there is a new MP10 installer, or do I just tell the existing one to use the new KDW Binary folder from 0.78f?

[Colonel O'Neill]

I reshacked my own shell32.dll, and use it whenever version numbers match.

I also didn't have KDllInst replace anything where my existing file was newer than the one to replace it. Shell32.dll was not replaced.

I'll upload you shell32.dll if necessary.

[blackwingcat]

Hi, Colonel O'Neill

What does 'reshacked' mean ?
If KDllInst can't replace shell32.dll you set temporarily disable Security software and try again.
or copy from \WINNT\system32\dllcache\shell32.dll to \winnt\system32\shell32.dll on Recovery console.

Colonel O'Neill, on Aug 12 2009, 01:05 PM, said:

I reshacked my own shell32.dll, and use it whenever version numbers match.

I also didn't have KDllInst replace anything where my existing file was newer than the one to replace it. Shell32.dll was not replaced.

I'll upload you shell32.dll if necessary.

[Colonel O'Neill]

I changed the icons in shell32.dll myself with Resource Hacker

I can't figure out how to use EzInstall mode; the button is disabled.
I'm not sure which folder to refer in the top part.

[blackwingcat]

Please tell me What its icon wrongs in shell32.dll resource.
I want to correct it.

EzInstall mode:
1. Check EZ KD Reg
2. Reboot
3. Select target folder.
4. Select used DLL
5. Press EzInstall Button.
6. It finishes Copy

Colonel O'Neill, on Aug 13 2009, 05:57 AM, said:

I changed the icons in shell32.dll myself with Resource Hacker

I can't figure out how to use EzInstall mode; the button is disabled.
I'm not sure which folder to refer in the top part.

[Syclone0044]

Mr BlackWingCat, you are a hero for all us Die hard Windows 2000 users. As I mentioned earlier on post #174, your KDW/crm2k019 kit got Google Chrome 2.0.166 working on my Windows 2000 - thank you very much!

But I still have a few issues, for instance Right-Click Chrome Title Bar, "Task manager" and then Drag the bottom of the window vertically downwards, then the window is not painted properly...

At first it works perfect:

But after dragging its broken:

Also there are some ToolTip bugs when pointing at Tabs in Chrome.

Can I just swap the advapixp.dll 2008/11/22, kernelxp.dll 2009/05/24, and userxp.dll 2009/03/19 that came with chrm2k019, and update to the newest ones from KDW 078f? (all from 2009/08/xx)

This post has been edited by Syclone0044: 18 August 2009 - 01:48 AM

[blackwingcat]

Hi, Syclone0044.

I fixed Chrome Installer for Windows 2000 v2.0b.
You also can use chrome version 3.0.190.1～4.0.201.1 on Windows 2000 in this version
note: v3.0 and 4.0 require Win2000-KB915985-v2

Thx

Syclone0044, on Aug 18 2009, 04:46 PM, said:

Mr BlackWingCat, you are a hero for all us Die hard Windows 2000 users. As I mentioned earlier on post #174, your KDW/crm2k019 kit got Google Chrome 2.0.166 working on my Windows 2000 - thank you very much!

This post has been edited by win2000: 19 August 2009 - 01:37 AM

[modicr]

Hello!

win2000, on Aug 19 2009, 09:34 AM, said:

I fixed Chrome Installer for Windows 2000 v2.0b.
You also can use chrome version 3.0.190.1～4.0.201.1 on Windows 2000 in this version
note: v3.0 and 4.0 require Win2000-KB915985-v2

Great! Using your installer v2.1 and Mulder's Chromium Updater ( http://mulder.dummwi...ojects#chromium ) I was able to post this message from Chromium 4.0.204.0 (Developer Build 24436)
( http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapsho...m-rel-xp/24436/ )

Thanks, Roman

This post has been edited by modicr: 26 August 2009 - 02:56 AM

[HardDriv'n]

modicr, on Aug 26 2009, 04:56 AM, said:

Great! Using your installer v2.1 and Mulder's Chromium Updater ( http://mulder.dummwi...ojects#chromium ) I was able to post this message from Chromium 4.0.204.0 (Developer Build 24436)
( http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/snapsho...m-rel-xp/24436/ )

Thanks, Roman

Does installing Google Chrome as specified above require the KDW package, and does anyone have an English tutorial on how to get programs like Chrome running on Win2k?

[Crash&Burn]

HardDriv'n, on Sep 24 2009, 04:18 PM, said:

Does installing Google Chrome as specified above require the KDW package, and does anyone have an English tutorial on how to get programs like Chrome running on Win2k?

Looks like it's here on Black Winged Cat's page. Scroll to about mid-page for downloads.

[Ninho]

Hi, B.W.Cat! You're the champ !

win2000, on Aug 19 2009, 09:34 AM, said:

note: v3.0 and 4.0 require Win2000-KB915985-v2

Would that be the fix described at : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/915985 ?

I can't see any mention of "v2" there, alright ?

[Edited by Ninho] Ah, I see now, that is the fix from YOUR page http://blog.livedoor...ves/360097.html


Now, the MS kb article says their (non-v2) fix is for Win 2k Server. Can we/must we install your fixed ntdll to Win 2k Pro Workstation, too, before installing your Chrome package ?

This post has been edited by Ninho: 08 October 2009 - 05:03 AM

[marxo]

Is there anyway to get the GetLayeredWindowAttributes in user32.dll?

[Syclone0044]

win2000, on Aug 19 2009, 02:34 AM, said:

Hi, Syclone0044.

I fixed Chrome Installer for Windows 2000 v2.0b.
You also can use chrome version 3.0.190.1～4.0.201.1 on Windows 2000 in this version
note: v3.0 and 4.0 require Win2000-KB915985-v2

I am posting this from a fresh Windows 2000 VM with SP4, URP1, the user32, kernel32, and shell32 security updates, and Chrome 4.0.220.1 (Oct 2009) installed with crm2k30.

I did not install KB915985-v2. Why is this necessary? It seems to function OK without it?

I am concerned about replacing my critical NTDLL.DLL with a hacked/patched version. No offense to you Mr. BlackWingCat, you seem to know what you're doing, but NTDLL.DLL is used by every process on my system and I can't afford to risk system stability.

[cluberti]

Syclone0044, on Oct 7 2009, 04:28 PM, said:

I did not install KB915985-v2. Why is this necessary? It seems to function OK without it?

you would only need 915985 if you're:

• Running Windows 2000 Server
  
• Using File Replication Services (FRS)
  
• Replicating a large number of small files to another FRS member
  
• Have compression enabled on the FRS volume(s) containing said small files
  
• Want to run Google Chrome 3.x or 4.x

Unless you fit that list, you don't actually NEED 915985. As to system stability, I'd probably be as paranoid about it as you are, however, given that there hasn't been a new version of ntdll since March 2006 (915985), changes have had time to be fairly well tested.

[Syclone0044]

cluberti, on Oct 7 2009, 04:35 PM, said:

Syclone0044, on Oct 7 2009, 04:28 PM, said:

I did not install KB915985-v2. Why is this necessary? It seems to function OK without it?

you would only need 915985 if you're:

• Running Windows 2000 Server
  
• Using File Replication Services (FRS)
  
• Replicating a large number of small files to another FRS member
  
• Have compression enabled on the FRS volume(s) containing said small files
  
• Want to run Google Chrome 3.x or 4.x

Unless you fit that list, you don't actually NEED 915985. As to system stability, I'd probably be as paranoid about it as you are, however, given that there hasn't been a new version of ntdll since March 2006 (915985), changes have had time to be fairly well tested.

I think you're confusing KB915985 with BlackWingCat's custom patched KB915982-v2.

I am running Google Chrome 4.0 and I do not have either version of 915985. So why do I need it? That is the question. What consequence do I face if I opt not to update it?

[cluberti]

Syclone0044, on Oct 8 2009, 07:05 PM, said:

I think you're confusing KB915985 with BlackWingCat's custom patched KB915982-v2.

I am running Google Chrome 4.0 and I do not have either version of 915985. So why do I need it? That is the question. What consequence do I face if I opt not to update it?

Indeed I was. Revised my list:
you would only need 915985 if you're:

• Running Windows 2000 Server
  
• Using File Replication Services (FRS)
  
• Replicating a large number of small files to another FRS member
  
• Have compression enabled on the FRS volume(s) containing said small files

Unless you see the above as a need for your box, you don't "need" it at all.

[blackwingcat]

Syclone0044, on Oct 9 2009, 08:05 AM, said:

I think you're confusing KB915985 with BlackWingCat's custom patched KB915982-v2.

I am running Google Chrome 4.0 and I do not have either version of 915985. So why do I need it? That is the question. What consequence do I face if I opt not to update it?

Hi Syclone0044.
I found there is a bug in RtlCaptureStackBackTrace.

RtlCaptureStackBackTrace bug apears with the Google Chrome 3.0. and SRWare Iron.
KB915985-v2 is fixed RtlCaptureStackBackTrace bug from KB915985.

Perhaps Chrome 4.0 banished this bug.

This post has been edited by blackwingcat: 13 October 2009 - 07:05 PM

[blackwingcat]

marxo, on Oct 7 2009, 02:46 AM, said:

Is there anyway to get the GetLayeredWindowAttributes in user32.dll?

What application is it used ?
KDW user32.dll supported this function.